buildings
Article
Tower Crane Location Optimization for Heavy Unit Lifting in
High-Rise Modular Construction
Hosang Hyun 1 , Moonseo Park 2 , Dowan Lee 3 and Jeonghoon Lee 4, *






Citation: Hyun, H.; Park, M.; Lee, D.;
Lee, J. Tower Crane Location
Optimization for Heavy Unit Lifting
in High-Rise Modular Construction.
Buildings 2021, 11, 121. https://
doi.org/10.3390/buildings11030121
Academic Editor: Carlos
Oliveira Cruz
Received: 4 February 2021
Accepted: 16 March 2021
Published: 18 March 2021
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
iations.
Copyright: © 2021 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Buildings 2021, 11, 121. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings11030121
1 Department of Seoul Housing Urban Research Center, Seoul Housing and Communities Corporation,
Gaepo-ro 621, Gangnam-gu, Seoul 06336, Korea; hhs518@i-sh.co.kr
2 Department of Architecture and Architectural Engineering, Seoul National University, Gwanak-ro 1,
Gwanak-gu, Seoul 08826, Korea; mspark@snu.ac.kr
3 ROKAF Education and Training Command, 46, Songbaek-ro, Geumsan-myeon, Jinju-si,
Gyeongsangnam-do 52634, Korea; genus39@hotmail.com
4 Department of Architecture Engineering, Gyeongsang National University, Dongjin-ro, Junju-si,
Gyeongnam 52725, Korea
* Correspondence: jhleepro@gnu.ac.kr
Abstract: Modular construction, which involves unit production in factories and on-site work, has
benefits such as low cost, high quality, and short duration, resulting from the controlled factory
environment utilized. An efficient tower crane lifting plan ensures successful high-rise modular
project completion. For improved efficiency, the lifting plan should minimize the reaching distance
of the tower crane, because this distance directly affects the tower crane capacity, which is directly
related to crane operation cost. In situations where units are lifted from trailers, the trailer-to-tower
crane distance can have a significant impact on the tower crane operation efficiency. However,
optimization of this distance to improve efficiency has not been sufficiently considered. This research
proposes a genetic algorithm optimization model that suggests optimized tower crane and trailer
locations. The case study results show that through the proposed model, the project manager can
reflect the optimal location selection and optimal tower crane selection options with minimal cost.
Keywords: modular construction; tower crane; lifting plan; optimization; genetic algorithm (GA),
high-rise construction
1. Introduction
Modular buildings consist of prefabricated room-sized units that are produced in fac-
tories [1]. Modular construction has benefits of improved productivity, short construction
period, high quality, and project safety due to the use of controlled factory work environ-
ments [2–4]. Although the modular construction method benefits from manufacturing in
factories, even in a highly modular project, a significant proportion of the work is still con-
ducted on-site [1]. In the planning of high-rise modular project on-site work, the selection
and positioning of tower cranes on the construction site are essential because heavy units
have to be lifted [5–7]. In stick-built construction, the major objectives of a tower crane
operation plan are minimization of the operating cost, transportation time, and possibility
of conflict by adjusting the weight of the material package or modifying the lifting point.
Then, the location is selected depending on the objectives [8–10]. However, in modular
construction on-site work, the tower crane capacity is directly related to operational effi-
ciency such as cost; therefore, the objective of the operation plan should focus on reducing
the tower crane capacity. This is because the weight of the material cannot be adjusted as
heavy units cannot be divided. In addition, because the tower crane is usually used for unit
lifting, the supply and demand points cannot be modified. Therefore, the capacity affects
cost more than the operational time and the total tower crane transportation distance.
During the tower crane operational planning, the capacity is estimated based on a
combination of the maximum distance where the tower crane should reach and the weight
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/buildings
Buildings 2021, 11, 121 2 of 13

of the material. For high-rise modular projects in urban areas, the units are transported to
their destinations by tower cranes from trailers parked nearby because of space constraints.
The distance from the trailer parking location to the tower crane can be greater than the
distance from the tower crane to the destination of the unit. In this situation, if the tower
crane location is selected without a computer-aided calculation method considering trailer
location, the tower crane capacity can be overestimated to prevent the situation in which
the units cannot be lifted.
However, the trailer parking location has not been considered as a major variable in
tower crane location planning for modular construction [5–12]. To overcome the limitations
this research focuses on single tower crane location optimization considering the trailer
location and destination of each unit. Further, the tower crane capacity is estimated
according to the optimized location and unit weight. To achieve these objectives, an
extensive literature review is conducted to analyze the important factors that should be
considered in tower crane location planning for heavy unit lifting. Then, using a genetic
algorithm (GA), an optimization model is developed for optimal tower crane location and
tower crane capacity determination. Finally, to validate this optimization model, a case
study is conducted. In this research, it is assumed that (1) the tower crane is only used for
unit lifting, (2) the weight of each unit is uniform, and (3) the capacity is affected only by
the reaching distance and weight.

2. Tower Crane Operation Plan for Stick-Built Construction

A tower crane is usually located at the optimal position for handling the heavy and
bulky materials, and its jib should cover all of the parts of the buildings on the construction
site to transport the materials [9]. Therefore, for tower crane location selection on construc-
tion sites and capacity estimation, numerous studies have been conducted. To reduce the
total material transportation time when using a single tower crane in building construction,
mathematical prescriptive optimization models have been proposed [11]. To cover the
overall material demand and supply points and to satisfy the excessive needs of tower
cranes in large construction projects. Zhang et al. [10] developed a computerized math-
ematical model that optimizes the location of a group of tower cranes and predicts and
minimizes conflicts and interference. The model can be employed to locate the supply and
demand points. To improve single tower crane operation optimization results, including
the material supply and demand points, Huang et al. [9] proposed a mixed-integer linear
model based on the model of [10]. Wu et al. [13] also presented a crane selection algo-
rithm considering the clearance between the boom/jib and lifted material, ground bearing
pressure, lifting capacity of the crane, and boom/jib combinations of a lattice boom crane.
Wang et al. [14] developed a BIM-based optimization model for automatic optimized tower
crane layout generation, including the material supply location. Marzouk and Abubakr [15]
proposed a framework for tower crane type, number, and location selection to improve
the tower crane utilization rate. Then, to prevent collisions during tower crane operation,
a 4D simulation and case study were conducted. Younes and Marzouk [16] proposed
Agent-based simulation for tower crane layout planning. This study focused on how
construction activity conflicts affect overall tower crane layout planning. Riga et al. [17]
suggesting a mathematical model related to cost-optimal positions considering tower crane
and storage areas. However, this paper focuses on optimizing the distance between the
operation of the tower crane and the storage area, so there is a limitation that the possible
range of lifting can be set wider than that of other studies. In the stick-built construction,
tower crane location optimization focused on minimizing the operation cost, which is
estimated based on the operation time and number of cranes. However, in modular unit
lifting, the tower crane operation plan has different optimization objectives. In modular
construction on-site work, a tower crane is typically used to lift heavy units that cannot
be divided and the crane operation is intermittent. Therefore, to reduce the tower crane
operation cost, the tower crane capacity should be minimized by reducing the distance that
the crane must reach.
Buildings 2021, 11, 121 3 of 13

3. Tower Crane Operation Plan for Modular Construction

Many studies have been conducted to improve the operational efficiency of cranes
in modular construction on-site work. Lei et al. [18] proposed a method of establishing
feasible module lifting paths by using an automated system to reduce the manual path-
checking practice when there are numerous mobile cranes at a congested site. Han et al. [7]
presented a visual 3D simulation model for preventing collisions during lifting operations
and validating various lifting operation plans for modular on-site work. In these studies,
the working radius was considered to be an important factor in crane location for collision
prevention, and unit lifting from the trailers was assumed to be conducted near the cranes.
Olearczyk et al. [12] proposed a crane selection method and introduced mathematical
algorithms for lifting operation planning. In their research, the maximum weight from
the pickup point was considered for crane location identification and determination of
the location that would minimize the crane capacity. Their study is significant in that
the weight and distance were considered as the major factors when planning modular
on-site work; however, it is limited in that the distance was estimated without considering
the trailer location. Liew et al. [19] emphasize that high-rise modular building projects
have a much larger one-time lifting weight than other high-rise building projects, so it
is important to be careful when selecting tower crane specifications. In addition, it is
proposed to review various alternatives for selecting the location of the tower crane and the
modular lifting position by reflecting the site conditions in the early stages of the project.
GOH and Jian et al. [20] proposed a simulation model for mitigating human factor-related
safety risk during the modular construction on-site crane lift. This study emphasizes
both the risk and importance of modular site installation and is useful in creating a safety
management system for crane lifting plans at the project planning stage. However, this
study has limitations in its use to create an alternative that can increase the productivity of
on-site lifting.
Hussein and Zayed [21] analyzed papers related to crane lifting of modular construc-
tion through a mixed review method. In this study, papers related to the lifting of modular
construction cranes are increasing every year, and it has been confirmed that most of the
studies are focusing on the field of automation to improve lifting efficiency. In particular,
unlike mobile cranes, tower cranes have to be operated continuously until the endpoint
after installation on-site, so the importance of selecting specifications was emphasized.
To maximize the benefits of modular construction, high-rise building in dense urban
areas using modular construction also has been considered and implemented [1,12,22,23].
When lifting units for high-rise modular buildings, tower cranes are used because (1) they
are suitable for a wide range of work assignments and (2) they are the key apparatus
for vertical and horizontal transportation of materials, especially heavy prefabricated
units and large panels for the formworks of high-rise buildings [9,23]. In the typical
modular unit on-site assembly method, the units are lifted directly from the trailers to their
destinations [24]. When conducting a high-rise modular building project in a dense urban
area, the construction site may not be sufficient to store the prefabricated modular units [22].
Moreover, the trailer transporting the units may not be able to access the construction
site, in which case the units are lifted from the trailer outside the construction site. In this
situation, the maximum distance to be used for tower crane capacity estimation can change
according to the trailer parking location and site conditions. Therefore, an optimization
process is needed to reduce the maximum distance and the distance must be estimated by
adjusting the alternatives of tower crane and trailer parking location.

4. Methodology
4.1. Optimization Methodology
There is numerous research methodology related to optimization keywords; such as
mixed-integer linear programming, ant colony optimization, particle swarm optimization,
and colliding bodies optimization. In mixed-integer linear programming, it has the advan-
tage of being able to draw accurate conclusions according to mathematical formulas. In
Buildings 2021, 11, 121 4 of 13

particular, this method can pre-set a reference value for the choice of an alternative, so that
a common conclusion can be reached on the interpretation of the results [25–27]. However,
this method has a disadvantage in that it takes too much time to derive an optimization
result, and it is difficult to accurately make a mathematical model that implements an
optimization model to solve the problem [28,29]. The ant colony optimization (ACO) also
applies to optimization problems, such as the traveling salesman problem (TSP). However,
the ACO has a limitation in that there are many parameter values and reacts too sensitively
to the parameters, so that the deviation of the result values may increase [30]. The parti-
cle swarm optimization (PSO) is one of the wide-area optimization methods and finally
achieves objective function optimization by simultaneously improving candidate solutions
through iterative calculations. However, PSO is based on a completely different concept
from genetic algorithms. This focuses on the characteristics of the individuals within the
target group and the exchange of information between them. Therefore, it is difficult to
derive an internal condition search result that considers both the optimal distance condition
and the physical constraint condition of the tower crane and the modular lift position [31].
In addition, there are powerful new optimization research methods of Colliding Bodies
Optimization (CBO) and Vibrating Particles Systems (VPS), but these have a problem that it
is difficult to express the tower crane lifting condition and trailer position relatively simply
and easily [32,33].
When performing tower crane location selection, it is necessary to consider variables
such as the trailer location, destinations of the units, and alternative tower crane locations
simultaneously. Therefore, a methodology that can optimize multiple variables is needed.
A genetic algorithm (GA) is frequently used to solve such optimization problems. GA solves
optimization problems by applying the principle of evolution, in which only the object
most suitable for the considered environment survives [34]. The optimization procedure is
implemented in the form of evolving genes through processes such as selection, crossover,
and mutation. In the GA reproduction process, the best-fit solution has a few chances
for reproduction, whereas the least-fit solution may not reproduce at all. By repeating
this reproduction process, the optimization outcome is improved. In the GA optimization
process, the solutions of any problems can be represented by sets of parameters. These
parameters are defined as the genes of chromosomes and can be structured by strings of
values in the binary form [35]. Therefore, a GA is effective for solving combinatorial and
discrete optimization problems and can also be used to solve mixed-discrete nonlinear
optimization problems [36]. Thus, it is suitable for solving the combinatorial optimization
problem in this research. The framework of the optimization model is shown in Figure 1.

4.2. Input Data Representation for Model

The first steps in developing the model are to (1) represent the site conditions as (x, y)
coordinates and (2) to use the coordinates as input data. In this research, the site is gridded
and 0.5 m is set as the base unit of the width and height for the (x, y) coordinates. The
first reason for doing so is that the sizes of the modular units assumed in this research
vary, including 3 m × 6 m, 3 m × 9 m, and 2 m × 6 m. When identifying the centers of
gravity of the units, 0.5 m is the maximum width and height unit. The second reason is
that, if the coordinate interval is increased, the spatial efficiency of the construction site
decreases because the amount of dead space would also increase. Then, the site at which
the building is constructed and the carriageway for the trailer location are separated to
implement the assumption that the trailer cannot enter the construction site. To increase
the model efficiency, the areas where units cannot be installed, the tower crane cannot be
located, or the trailer cannot be parked, are excluded from the model. Figure 2 shows an
example of site representation using coordinates. After representing the site conditions
using coordinates, three variables related to tower crane and trailer location selection are
identified. The first variable is the location at which a particular modular unit is to be
installed, and the second variable is the installation location of the tower crane. Even
though it is considered that the modular units and tower crane can be located anywhere on
Buildings 2021, 11, 121 5 of 13

the construction site, in this case, this model can consider the design to determine the tower
crane location when a building design is an input, as shown in the case study. The last
variable is the trailer location and the trailer is located on the road near the construction
site. The distance between the tower crane and trailer and between the tower crane and
unit destination is estimated by calculating the distance between the coordinates. Then, as
building information data, the unit weight and building height are input to obtain tower
crane specification suggestions. Finally, to identify the tower cranes satisfying the lifting
conditions, a tower crane database comprising data such as self-reliance height, tip-load,
and the rental fee is established. Based on the above-mentioned data, suggested tower
crane and trailer locations and tower crane specifications are obtained by implementing
the data processing approach described in the next section.

4.3. Data Processing for Location Selection

After identifying the input data and variables, data processing for the tower crane and
trailer location selection is conducted. To estimate the tower crane capacity, two distances
are calculated using the tower crane, trailer, unit location variables: (1) the distance from the
trailer to the tower crane and (2) the distance from the units to the tower crane, as shown
in Figure 3. Considering the location variables, the greatest distance that the tower crane
should reach for lifting is derived, and to minimize this distance, optimization is conducted
by using the GA in Step 1 of the model framework. Equation (1) is the optimization object
employed to reduce the greatest distance.

min[max{Tower Crane, Trailer}, max{Tower Crane, Units}] (1)

To minimize the greatest distance using the GA, the variables indicated using coordi-
nates, such as the tower crane, unit, and trailer locations, are converted into chromosomes.
Figure 4 shows the definition of the chromosome structure. The chromosome length (P)
is defined as the sum of the number of locations with coordinates at which the tower
crane can be located (Pc) and the number of locations with coordinates at which the trailer
can be located (Pt). The gene is defined as the number of tower cranes located at the
coordinates. For example, when the tower crane is located at Px, the gene is expressed as
“1”; otherwise, the gene is expressed as “0”. The trailer location genes are represented in
the same way as those of the tower crane. In this research, it is assumed that a single tower
crane and trailer could be located, so the sum of the gene values is two. The genes act as
variables for deriving the optimal tower crane and trailer parking locations depending
on the unit installation locations. The optimization results can be improved by iteratively
combining the tower crane and trailer parking locations, and better results can be obtained
by increasing the number of iterations.
After optimizing the two distances, the tower crane capacity can be estimated by
using the greatest distance and maximum weight of each unit. Then, from a database
including the maximum tip-load according to distance, self-reliance height, and rental
fee, a suggested tower crane model and specifications satisfying the lifting capacity can
be obtained. Among the suggested tower cranes, those with self-reliance heights greater
than the building height are listed as shown in Step 2 of the model framework. In general,
if a tower crane satisfying the conditions does not exist or the unit weights change, it is
necessary to return to the first step to reselect a tower crane with changing input data
such as site conditions and input more tower cranes into the database. Then, the model
results provide tower crane and trailer locations as well as tower crane specifications such
as capacity, self-reliance height, and rental fee. Moreover, if multiple tower cranes are
suggested, the tower cranes are ranked according to the rental fee to inform decisions
regarding the on-site work plan.
Buildings 2021, 11, 121 6 of 13

Figure 1. Tower crane selection model framework.

Buildings 2021, 11, 121 7 of 13

Figure 2. Conversion of site conditions into coordinates (legend: (a) is the initial construction plan, (b) is the road shape and
building layout area of the initial construction plan).

Figure 3. Distance estimation.

Figure 4. Definition of chromosome structure.

Buildings 2021, 11, 121 8 of 13

5. Case Study
This section presents the case study conducted to validate the model for tower crane
and trailer location selection in a high-rise modular building project by comparing the
greatest distance in the initial tower crane operation plan and the greatest distance in the
optimization results. The selected project is a modular apartment building that has not
yet been constructed and the initial tower crane and trailer locations in the on-site work
plan are used in the case study. Table 1 provides a profile of the case project. The case
project is a seven-story modular building consisting of 62 units of two types (3 m × 6 m,
2 m × 6 m), and to lift the units. To ensure the use of a tower crane, the number of stories
in the building is increased from seven to fifteen (45 m, where the height of each floor is
about 3 m). Also, in this study, to optimize the tower crane, only the physical conditions
(the arrangement of modular buildings, the distance between the road and the building)
are maintained among the existing building conditions, and the liftable areas (the location
of the tower crane installation, the location of the trailer) are all areas that can be used.
In the tower crane database, the product name of the tower crane changes the luffing type
and t-type tower crane as follows; luffing type a, luffing type b.

Table 1. Revised case study project information.

Initial Modular
Contents Revised Modular Project Information
Project Information
Location Seoul, South Korea
Site Area 3070.50 m2
Purpose Multi-Purpose Building (Apartment, Commercial)
Story 7 Stories 15 Stories
Height 27 m 45 m
No. of Units 62 units
Maximum Weight 14 ton (Unit: 12 ton, Balance Beam: 2 ton)

The coordinates of the centers of the weight of the modular units are included as
reference points to estimate the distance from the tower crane. After inputting the weight,
the tower crane and trailer locations are selected by using the GA. Based on the estimated
values such as weight and locations, tower crane specifications satisfying the lifting con-
dition are derived from the database. By comparing the tower crane self-reliance and
building heights, tower crane models are identified. Among the listed tower cranes, the
tower crane with the lowest capacity and rental fee is suggested.
For the optimization analysis, in this study, the site conditions were plotted based on
the initial modular construction plan. First, the road conditions and the shape of the site
are extracted, and then the building layout plan is reflected. The extracted schematic part
is applied with a grid so that the x, y coordinates can be set to enable GA analysis, and
these coordinates are divided into the following areas; Trailer navigation area, tower crane
navigation area (Figure 5).
Considering the working characteristics of the luffing tower crane, this crane can only
vertically move and rotate the lifted object, and it cannot be moved horizontally using a
trolley in the field like a T-type tower crane as shown in Table 2. Therefore, it is necessary
to give the minimum clearance distance from the result of calculating the maximum lifting
distance and height. In this case, for example, if the initial maximum distance of 15.4 m
is obtained, the minimum jib length of the crane should be 20 m. On the other hand,
following the result of this study, a jib length of 15m is sufficient for 12.9 m. As mentioned
above, the result of minimizing the minimum jib length of the luffing tower crane used in
urban dense construction can improve construction efficiency and reduce costs.
After setting the search condition, for tower crane and trailer location optimization,
Evolver 5.5 and Microsoft Excel 2010 software are employed. The initial population size
is 100, and the mutation rate is set to 0.1. At this time, uniform crossover calculations are
performed with the crossover rate set to 0.5. Based on the given optimization condition, the
Buildings 2021, 11, 121 9 of 13

optimization results are derived. As a result, the optimal location of the tower crane and
trailer was derived to the south of the building, and the most suitable tower crane specifi-
cations were also selected (Figure 6). When comparing the specifications and rental costs of
the top 10 tower cranes selected based on the location, it was confirmed that the difference
in rental costs between the rank 1 and rank 10 places was $16,361/month (Table 3). In this
study, many assumptions and restrictions were placed for the selection of the optimal
location of the tower crane for a high-rise modular building, but it was confirmed that cost
loss, as well as efficient construction management, was difficult if the optimal alternative
was not selected at the same location through case studies. In particular, through this result,
it was confirmed that if rank 1 is not rented during the actual construction period, it can be
used as basic data for selecting the specifications of rank 2 and rank 3 immediately.
In particular, considering the relationship between the jib length of the top three tower
cranes and the tip rod, the optimal location of the tower crane in a high-rise modular
construction will lead to a problem in which a completely new type of tower crane can be
searched as long as the modular weight cannot be changed (Figure 7).

Figure 5. Set a tower crane and trailer location searching area based on the initial construction plan (legend: (a) is the road
shape and building layout area of the initial construction plan, (b) is the search area for optimization).

Table 2. Tower crane types and features.

Type Shape Advantages Disadvantages

- Fast working speed - There must be no obstacles

- Low cost compared to Luffing Type within the working radius
T-type
- Easy supply and demand - Limited installation location
Tower crane
of equipment - Complaints may arise in
violation of superficies

- Effective when there is an obstacle - Limited number of

with a vertical undulation type
- Effective in preventing superficial
infringement caused by Jib’s
L-type
rotation radius
Tower crane
- Easy to work in narrow spaces in
(Luffing type tower crane)
downtown areas
- Compared to T-type, there is room
for coping on one or two floors
equipment, it is necessary to
check the time to put on site
- Higher equipment rental
cost compared to T-type
- The reduction in weight that
can be lifted according to the
distance is relatively large
- Equipment start-up is
slower than T-type
Buildings 2021, 11, 121 10 of 13

Figure 6. Finding the optimal location for tower crane and trailers (legend: (a) is the search area for the genetic algorithm
(GA) optimization, (b) is the GA search results report summary, (c) is the optimal position of the tower crane and trailer
after the end of the search (green box: tower crane position, red sphere: trailer position)).

Table 3. Optimization results and suggested tower cranes.

Tower Crane MAXIMUM Lifting

Optimized Maximum
Tower Crane Self-Reliance Height in Weight in Optimized Rental Cost
Rank Jib Length
Type Optimized Positon Position (Unit: $/Month)
(Unit: Meter)
(Unit: Meter) (Unit: Ton)
1 Luffing Type 16.0 58.7 16.0 14,300
2 Luffing Type 16.0 64.9 16.0 14,019
3 Luffing Type 19.2 58.7 19.2 17,513
4 Luffing Type 24.0 74.0 24.0 21,024
5 Luffing Type 24.0 53.3 23.0 21,454
6 Luffing Type 23.0 59.1 23.0 24,080
7 Luffing Type 22.5 59.1 22.5 24,518
8 Luffing Type 32.0 77.8 32.0 28,021
9 Luffing Type 32.0 74.4 32.0 30,649
10 Luffing Type 27.5 53.3 27.5 30,661

Figure 7. The relationship between the change in jib length and maximum lifting loads following from rank 1 to 3 tower
crane’s specifications.
Buildings 2021, 11, 121 11 of 13

6. Discussion
In general, the final goal of the tower crane location optimization study can be divided
into improving the lifting efficiency and minimizing the operating cost. It is assumed
that the weight of the object being lifted can be partially adjusted once, and the location
of the yard reflects the characteristics of repeating creation and destruction depending
on whether or not materials are used. After this process, the contractor manager or
construction manager finds and contracts a tower crane that can be rented during the
lifting period based on the minimum performance condition of the tower crane derived
from the research results. In the case of high-rise modular construction projects, the
construction period is shorter than that of conventional construction projects of similar
size, and the proportion of the total construction occupied by the load on the site is larger.
In addition, the controllable part of one-time lift weight is limited and heavy, so the
selection and location of the tower crane specifications optimized with limited information
in the early stages of construction are very important for successful project completion.
Previous studies related to the selection and optimization of tower cranes in high-rise
modular construction also highlighted this point. However, these studies had limitations
in adjusting the position of the trailer to fit the modular size or reflecting the point that
the position of the tower crane can change according to the change in the arrangement
of the modular building. So, this study focused on developing a framework that could
provide the project manager with the tower crane specifications and location with limited
information in the early stages of the project. First of all, the trailer location was first
considered during the initial lift planning stage. By placing the trailer near the tower crane,
the distance from the tower crane to the trailer could be reduced. However, the greatest
distance differs between the initial and optimized lifting plans even with a simple site
shape and building design.
The findings demonstrate that accurate results can be obtained by computer-aided
modeling and that the difference between the greatest distances can cause tower crane
capacity overestimation. In heavy unit lifting, distance reduction is important because the
distance is directly related to the tower crane operation efficiency. Moreover, the more
complicated the site and building shape is, the more difficult it is to select the optimal tower
crane and trailer locations and the more effective the model employed in this research.
If the specifications of the selected tower crane cause the determined operation cost
range to be exceeded, the construction manager can change the tower crane capacity by
modifying the unit weight. Unit weight modification also requires consultation among
the project participants, and the model developed in this research can be an effective tool
during this process. By applying this model, the time and cost, which must be considered
during planning, can be reduced and other optimized alternatives can be achieved easily.
In a dense urban area, it may not be possible for the trailer to be located at the optimal
location or the location may change according to permits for traffic control during on-site
unit lifting. By using the model developed in this research, alternatives can be suggested
based on the tower crane operation efficiency by excluding the locations at which the trailer
cannot be placed.

7. Conclusions
Modular construction involves unit manufacturing and on-site work and can be
employed in high-rise building construction. Modular unit lifting in high-rise modular
projects is considered to be important because heavy units have to be installed in dense
urban construction sites. In unit lifting, a high-capacity tower crane is used and the
tower crane location cannot be modified; therefore, the tower crane location should be
planned such that it can be performed with minimized operational cost. In tower crane
operation plans for modular projects, the tower crane capacity is directly related to the
operational cost and the distance from the tower crane to the object and unit weight are key
factors that can be employed to estimate the tower crane capacity. In modular tower crane
operation planning, the trailer location also should be considered when estimating the
Buildings 2021, 11, 121 12 of 13

greatest distance because there may not be sufficient space for the trailers transporting units.
Therefore, in this research, an optimization model for distance minimization considering
the tower crane and trailer locations that can suggest tower crane and trailer locations for
on-site unit lifting is developed. Then, a case study is conducted to validate the proposed
model. Moreover, in projects conducted at sites with complicated shapes, it is expected
that the model results will differ significantly and will be useful for tower crane and trailer
location selection. According to this research, the tower crane capacity can be estimated
accurately by considering the tower crane and trailer locations and can be reduced. The
optimization model can be employed to design building layout planning considering tower
crane operation plans or when changing trailer locations during on-site construction. This
research also has academic value. When deriving optimization results, several variables
should be considered and the process includes a number of combinatorial results and
results comparison. By using the optimization model developed in this research, the results
comparison process can be conducted automatically and the efficiency of the tower crane
location optimization process can be improved.
However, this research has certain limitations. Firstly, only a single tower crane and
single trailer location are considered, although multiple cranes can be effective in some
cases. Secondly, changes according to on-site work progress are not considered, although
other conditions such as the trailer location and unit weight could be modified and the
optimization process conducted again. Finally, the connection between the tower crane
and building core for capacity reduction is not considered. In future research, the model
will be extended to overcome these limitations to further improve the efficiency of on-site
lifting operations using Colliding Bodies Optimization and Vibrating Particle System.
Also, it is necessary to derive results reflecting the weight of each unit not uniform,
and capacity to be affected by other factors (i.e., changes according to on-site progress).

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, J.L., M.P. and D.L.; methodology, D.L. and H.H.; software,
D.L. and H.H.; validation, J.L. and D.L.; formal analysis, J.L. and D.L.; investigation, H.H.; resources,
D.L.; data curation, H.H.; writing—original draft preparation, H.H. and D.L.; writing—review and
editing, J.L. and M.P.; visualization, H.H.; supervision, J.L.; project administration, M.P. All authors
have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: The data that support the findings of this study are available from the
corresponding author upon reasonable request.
Acknowledgments: This work was supported by Gyeongsang National University Grant in 2020~2021.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Lawson, R.M.; Ogden, R.G.; Bergin, R. Application of Modular Construction in High-Rise Buildings. J. Arch. Eng. 2012, 18,
148–154. [CrossRef]
2. Eastman, C.M.; Sacks, R. Relative Productivity in the AEC Industries in the United States for On-Site and Off-Site Activities.
J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2008, 134, 517–526. [CrossRef]
3. Mullens, M.A. Factory Design for Modular Homebuilding: Equipping the Modular Factory for Success; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL,
USA, 2011.
4. Shaked, O.; Warszawski, A. CONSCHED: Expert System for Scheduling of Modular Construction Projects. J. Constr. Eng. Manag.
1992, 118, 488–506. [CrossRef]
5. Al-Hussein, M.; Alkass, S.; Moselhi, O. An algorithm for mobile crane selection and location on construction sites. Constr. Innov.
2001, 1, 91–105. [CrossRef]
6. Han, S.; Al-Hussein, M.; Hasan, S.; Gokce, K.U.; Bouferguene, A. Simulation of mobile crane operations in 3D space. In Proceed-
ings of the 2012 Winter Simulation Conference (WSC), Berlin, Germany, 9–12 December 2012; pp. 1–12.
7. Han, S.H.; Hasan, S.; Bouferguène, A.; Al-Hussein, M.; Kosa, J. Utilization of 3D Visualization of Mobile Crane Operations for
Modular Construction On-Site Assembly. J. Manag. Eng. 2015, 31, 04014080. [CrossRef]
Buildings 2021, 11, 121 13 of 13

8. Alkriz, K.; Mangin, J.C. A new model for optimizing the location of cranes and construction facilities using genetic algorithms.
In Proceedings 21st Annual ARCOM Conference, London, UK, 7–9 September 2005; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2005;
pp. 981–991.
9. Huang, C.; Wong, C.; Tam, C. Optimization of tower crane and material supply locations in a high-rise building site by
mixed-integer linear programming. Autom. Constr. 2011, 20, 571–580. [CrossRef]
10. Zhang, P.; Harris, F.C.; Olomolaiye, P.O.; Holt, G.D. Location Optimization for a Group of Tower Cranes. J. Constr. Eng. Manag.
1999, 125, 115–122. [CrossRef]
11. Rodriguez-Ramos, W.E.; Francis, R.L. Single Crane Location Optimization. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 1983, 109, 387–397. [CrossRef]
12. Olearczyk, J.; Al-Hussein, M.; Bouferguène, A. Evolution of the crane selection and on-site utili-zation process for modular
construction multilifts. Autom. Constr. 2014, 43, 59–72. [CrossRef]
13. Wu, D.; Lin, Y.; Wang, X.; Wang, X.; Gao, S. Algorithm of Crane Selection for Heavy Lifts. J. Comput. Civ. Eng. 2011, 25, 57–65.
[CrossRef]
14. Wang, J.; Zhang, X.; Shou, W.; Wang, X.; Xu, B.; Kim, M.J.; Wu, P. A BIM-based approach for automated tower crane layout
planning. Autom. Constr. 2015, 59, 168–178. [CrossRef]
15. Marzouk, M.; Abubakr, A. Decision support for tower crane selection with building information models and genetic algorithms.
Autom. Constr. 2016, 61, 1–15. [CrossRef]
16. Younes, A.; Marzouk, M. Tower cranes layout planning using agent-based simulation considering activity conflicts. Autom. Constr.
2018, 93, 348–360. [CrossRef]
17. Riga, K.; Jahr, K.; Thielen, C.; Borrmann, A. Mixed integer programming for dynamic tower crane and storage area opti-mization
on construction sites. Autom. Constr. 2020, 120, 103259. [CrossRef]
18. Liew, J.; Chua, Y.; Dai, Z. Steel concrete composite systems for modular construction of high-rise buildings. Structures 2019, 21,
135–149. [CrossRef]
19. Goh, J.; Hu, S.; Fang, Y. Human-in-the-Loop Simulation for Crane Lift Planning in Modular Construction On-Site Assembly.
In Computing in Civil Engineering 2019; American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE): Atlanta, GA, USA, 2019; pp. 71–78.
20. Hussein, M.; Zayed, T. Crane operations and planning in modular integrated construction: Mixed review of literature.
Autom. Constr. 2021, 122, 103466. [CrossRef]
21. Lei, Z.; Taghaddos, H.; Olearczyk, J.; Al-Hussein, M.; Hermann, U. Automated Method for Checking Crane Paths for Heavy Lifts
in Industrial Projects. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2013, 139, 04013011. [CrossRef]
22. Jaillon, L.; Poon, C. The evolution of prefabricated residential building systems in Hong Kong: A review of the public and the
private sector. Autom. Constr. 2009, 18, 239–248. [CrossRef]
23. Lawson, M.; Ogden, R.; Goodier, C. Design in Modular Construction; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2014.
24. Smith, R.E. Prefab Architecture: A Guide to Modular Design and Construction; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2011.
25. Sangaiah, A.K.; Tirkolaee, E.B.; Goli, A.; Dehnavi-Arani, S. Robust optimization and mixed-integer linear programming model
for LNG supply chain planning problem. Soft Comput. 2019, 24, 7885–7905. [CrossRef]
26. Batur, M.E.; Cihan, A.; Korucu, M.K.; Bektaş, N.; Keskinler, B. A mixed integer linear programming model for long-term planning
of municipal solid waste management systems: Against restricted mass balances. Waste Manag. 2020, 105, 211–222. [CrossRef]
27. Meng, L.; Zhang, C.; Ren, Y.; Zhang, B.; Lv, C. Mixed-integer linear programming and constraint programming formula-tions for
solving distributed flexible job shop scheduling problem. Comput. Ind. Eng. 2020, 142, 106347. [CrossRef]
28. Rahnamayan, S.; Tizhoosh, H.R.; Salama, M.M. A novel population initialization method for accelerating evolutionary algorithms.
Comput. Math. Appl. 2007, 53, 1605–1614. [CrossRef]
29. Anvari, B.; Angeloudis, P.; Ochieng, W. A multi-objective GA-based optimisation for holistic Manufacturing, transportation and
Assembly of precast construction. Autom. Constr. 2016, 71, 226–241. [CrossRef]
30. Treviño, C.A. Single Tower Crane Allocation Models Using Ant Colony Optimization; The University of Texas Rio Grande Valley: Ann
Arbor, MI, USA, 2017.
31. Adrian, A.M.; Utamima, A.; Wang, K.-J. A comparative study of GA, PSO and ACO for solving construction site layout
optimization. KSCE J. Civ. Eng. 2014, 19, 520–527. [CrossRef]
32. Kaveh, A.; Mahdavi, V. Colliding bodies optimization: A novel meta-heuristic method. Comput. Struct. 2014, 139, 18–27.
[CrossRef]
33. Kaveh, A.; Ghazaan, M.I. A new meta-heuristic algorithm: Vibrating particles system. Sci. Iran. 2017, 24, 551–566. [CrossRef]
34. Golberg, D.E. Genetic algorithms in search, optimization, and machine learning. Addion Wesley 1989, 102, 36.
35. Tam, C.M.; Tong, T.K.L.; Chan, W.K.W. Genetic Algorithm for Optimizing Supply Locations around Tower Crane. J. Constr.
Eng. Manag. 2001, 127, 315–321. [CrossRef]
36. Sawhney, A.; Mund, A. Adaptive Probabilistic Neural Network-based Crane Type Selection System. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2002,
128, 265–273. [CrossRef]